SynthesisDementia (London, England)2024
Setting individualised goals for people living with dementia and their family carers: A systematic review of goal-setting outcome measures and their psychometric properties.
Synthesis in Dementia (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring what matters: evaluating the psychometric properties of goal attainment scaling in a psychosocial dementia trial.Age and ageing · 2026Trial
- CareVR, a Virtual Reality assisted communication training programme to support informal carers of people with psychosis: a feasibility study.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Adapting the WHO ICOPE framework to design an integrated frailty and intrinsic capacity management community-based programme in Singapore: a programme description using the updated and modified TIDieR checklist.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- SOCAV, a nurse-led program promoting self-direction in nursing homes: a longitudinal mixed-methods pilot study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Using Photovoice to investigate the lived experiences of family care partners of people living with dementia: What supports their well-being in a care relationship?Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Development of the PRACTIC Goal Setting Interview (PGSI) for Frail Community-Dwelling Patients. Feasibility, Interrater Reliability and Content validity-a Mixed Methods Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Personalized goals of people living with dementia and family carers: A content analysis of goals set within an individually tailored psychosocial intervention trial.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividualised goal-setting outcome measures can be a useful way of reflecting people living with dementia and family carers' differing priorities regarding quality-of-life domains in the highly heterogeneous symptomatology of the disease. Evaluating goal-setting measures is challenging, and there is limited evidence for their psychometric properties.
aim(1) To describe what goal-setting outcomes have been used in this population; (2) To evaluate their validity, reliability, and feasibility in RCTs.
methodWe systematically reviewed studies that utilised goal-setting outcome measures for people living dementia or their family carers. We adapted a risk of bias and quality rating system based on the COSMIN guidelines to evaluate the measurement properties of outcomes when used within RCTs.
resultsThirty studies meeting inclusion criteria used four different goal-setting outcome measures: Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS), Bangor Goal Setting Interview (BGSI), Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and Individually Prioritized Problems Assessment (IPPA); other papers have reported study-specific goal-setting attainment systems. Only GAS has been used as an outcome over periods greater than 9 months (up to a year). Within RCTs there was moderate quality evidence for sufficient content validity and construct validity for GAS, COPM and the BGSI. Reliability was only assessed in one RCT (using BGSI); in which two raters reviewed interview transcripts to rate goals with excellent inter-rater reliability. Feasibility was reported as good across the measures with a low level of missing data.
conclusionWe found moderate quality evidence for good content and construct validity and feasibility of GAS, BGSI and COPM. While more evidence of reliability of these measures is needed, we recommend that future trials consider using individualised goal setting measures, to report the effect of interventions on outcomes that are most meaningful to people living with dementia and their families.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.